That great pamphleteer of freedom meant that the American colonists fighting for liberty were about to be tested by history.

For the brave men and women who have made 2011 an epochal year for Arab society, the testing will soon begin. They must now give shape to what they have accomplished. They must decide what it was that made them risk their lives and upend their societies.

Many of them used the word “democracy” in their demonstrations. Did they mean free speech, the fair treatment of minorities, independent judges, free education for both sexes and other practices that would require major innovations in Arab life? Or did they want simply to govern themselves?

Related

Over three decades the Mubarak regime encouraged the rising Islamization of Egyptian society. Did the hundreds of thousands who demonstrated in Cairo agree with that process? Or do they hope for a return to the cosmopolitan Egypt of 60 years ago?

Ahdaf Soueif, the Egyptian novelist and political writer, said she and her fellow demonstrators were “like people who’ve woken up from a spell, a nightmare.”

She said they revelled in the “inclusiveness” of the struggle. Everyone was represented in Tahrir Square: “The left is here, and the liberals. The Muslim Brotherhood is with us too, 5% to 7% of the people at the square. The demonstrators reveal the rich and complex texture of Egyptian society.”

The Muslim Brotherhood has for decades been regarded as a threat to peace in the Middle East. By reputation it’s narrow, bigoted and friendly to terrorism. That’s one reason Israel remains uneasy about the Egyptian uprising; a government that included the Brotherhood might well break off relations with Israel and increase the possibility of war.

But in the weeks since the Egyptian population exploded, a blizzard of newspaper pieces argued that the Brotherhood is far more benign than we imagine, that it mostly concerns itself with social services and that in any case it couldn’t possibly become an influential voice in a new Egyptian government.

Against that we have to put the uncomfortable fact that the Brotherhood is better organized than any other non-government Egyptian force, except the military.

In each country the rebels have different motives. In Bahrain they are all members of the large Shiite majority. They hope to see the last of the rich Sunni king who has burdened them with his rich Sunni friends. They may want nothing except a Shiite dictatorship that will treat the Sunnis as badly as the Sunnis have always treated them.

Perhaps they will then turn to Iran for protection. That would represent one form of democracy. It would also demonstrate that a majority can be as perverse as the worst king.

In this widespread Arab movement, the most surprising role has been played by Israel, which has played no role at all. That’s the reverse of what the world media, the academics and the diplomats have taught us to anticipate.

Among the demonstrators, Israel has rarely even been mentioned. How could that be?

André Glucksmann, the French philosopher, writing recently for the newspaper Libération, asked: “How many times has it been rammed down our throats that freedom and democracy count for nothing on ‘Arab streets,’ as long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rages?”

Tom Gross, a rigorous critic of journalism on the Middle East, notes that it now appears Egyptians don’t much care whether or not Jews live in the Gilo neighbourhood of south-western Jerusalem, even though at the end of 2010 senior British and U.S. officials insisted this was “a matter of paramount concern for the entire Arab world.”

It’s obvious that the new generation of Arabs has more important things to worry about, such as jobs and education and whether their countries will be run by politicians or thieves. They may decide to work with the only healthy economy in the region rather than fighting it.

Israel, currently the economic and technological wonder of the world, had a growth rate of 7.8% in the fourth quarter of 2010. It’s well placed to become the engine of industry and education for all the surrounding states.

President Shimon Peres tried to sell that idea as “the new Middle East” 15 or so years ago. The Arabs rejected it; now it looks as if he was only a few years ahead of history.